With technology advancing at such a rapid pace, American society is struggling to keep up. One area in which this struggle is clear is in the development of unmanned aircraft, known as drones. Military drones have been used by the United States for several decades, but small consumer drones have become readily available to the public in recent years, causing quite a stir. Major consumer drone companies, such as DJI and Parrot, have allowed for this increase in drone use by making drones both inexpensive and easy to operate. Already, these consumer drones have been used both to benefit and harm society. As the issue currently stands, drones will soon dominate many aspects of life, with many positive and negative implications for society. Drone enthusiasts and drone manufacturers argue that the benefits of consumer drones in society far outweigh any potential negative consequences. Many law enforcement agencies and other experts, however, believe that drones are far too dangerous to be allowed in society and should be banned or heavily restricted. Since drone use is expected to increase even more as companies produce cheaper drones with many additional features like cameras and payload bays, the government must decide what laws and regulations are necessary to ensure safety and security for the public. Ultimately, with some simple yet specific regulation changes, such as requiring mandatory licensing, extending no-fly zones, and amending line-of-site rules, consumer drones can become an integral part of the advancement of our society with marginal risk. 

To understand why drones are such a major concern for everyone, it is crucial to know exactly what a drone is and what they are capable of. The term "drone" is not a universal definition, but rather a loose and changing description. It is generally agreed upon by government agencies and the drone industry, however, that a drone is any Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, or UAV. By this definition, a drone can describe both an aircraft that is remotely controlled by a pilot on the ground and an aircraft that has a predetermined flight path (The Age of the Drone). It is also important to understand the difference between drones used for recreational purposes and drones used for commercial purposes. Recreational drones are used for operations that do not bring in revenue or perform business services. Commercial drones, on the other hand, are used by businesses in many different ways (The Age of the Drone).

Before addressing the many benefits drones can have on society, it is important to understand why drones are feared and why drone use is currently limited. Principally, people fear drones for three reasons: interaction with manned aircraft in national airspace, possible malicious uses and reckless flying, and invasion of privacy. While there have been no collisions between drones and manned aircraft to date, there were 650 sightings of drones by commercial pilots in the first eight months of 2015 alone, with one report citing the observed distance between the two as only ten feet (Waxman 18). This indicates not only that drones are a significant concern that needs to be examined, but also that new regulations are critically needed. The Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA, is the government agency overseeing all aspects of aviation, including consumer drones. The FAA plays a huge role in the integration of drones into the national airspace, but currently it is struggling to establish a clean procedure. Currently, it can issue civil penalties for "reckless operation" of drones, and they are trying to educate drone pilots about flying safely and responsibly (Hsu). Outside of this, however, the public is left waiting for official regulations and deadlines are constantly pushed. With consumer drone use increasing at such a rapid rate, the need for specific action from the FAA is quickly becoming evident. 

Another common fear regarding drones is the potential for drones to be used for malicious purposes, like carrying bombs or other weapons. Drones operating near stadiums and sporting events, for instance, have caused uproar (Rao 84). Drones could possibly be used to carry weapons in this circumstance, but the primary concern is really the pilot losing control of the drone and crashing it into fans. Most of the reported incidents have been a result of the pilot not knowing the rules and simply trying to get unique footage (Rao 85). It is clear that consumer drones pose a significant threat when used as weapons or weapon carriers. That said, this danger is exaggerated, as drones do not actually pose more of a problem than any other flying devices that have been around for much longer. Dr. Adam Harris, who is an expert on consumer drones, argues this point well. While some will argue that a drone's stable platform makes it an easier technology to abuse, Dr. Harris states that this is simply not true. Anything can be turned into a weapon if someone has bad intentions, and traditional model aircraft have always been just as capable, but managed to escape the controversy (Smith 295). This brings up a related point regarding the uproar over the potential malicious uses of drones: these issues have been around for decades and are extremely exaggerated. While the government is scrambling to make new drone-specific laws, similar laws are already in place. An article from the Boston Herald sums this point up well: "Flying a drone into someone's yard is trespassing. Shooting a drone you don't own is destruction of property. Directing a drone towards someone is assault with a dangerous weapon. Using a drone to spy on someone is a privacy invasion" (Van Sack). Overall, using a drone for malicious purposes is not as great of a concern as many people make it out to be. Devices with similar capabilities have been around for much longer and laws already in place have proven to be successful in protecting people, property, and privacy to a great extent. 

The final prominent danger associated with civilian drones is their impact on personal privacy. While the FAA regulates drone use, it does not regulate the privacy aspect. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, or NTIA, is the agency intended to be in charge of this issue, but it currently lacks official standards (Sterbenz). The NTIA is supposedly in the early stages of discussing the best practices for protecting privacy in the commercial and recreational drone industry. Once again, the important point here is that spying and espionage have, and will continue to be, illegal. Although a drone's small size and ease of operation can make invasion of personal privacy easier, issues like these have been around well before drone technology. Taly Matiteyahu, a Law School Director at Columbia University, explains this issue by stating, "The Fourth Amendment, along with all privacy and personal property laws, will be enforced for drone operators just as they are enforced for anyone else" (Matiteyahu 271). As long as training, licensing, and line-of-site rules are enforced for amateur drone operators, personal privacy can be expected. 

Overall, these fears are certainly warranted, as evidence shows that drones have been and will continue to be used in harmful and dangerous ways. Despite this, however, drones are far too much of a benefit to society to be heavily restricted. Some regulations are necessary, but drones must ultimately be incorporated into society. To show why this is the case, it is important to explain the many benefits drones can have on society. Both recreational and commercial drones have numerous benefits and are incredibly valuable to society.

The recreational drone community is massive and constantly growing, with links to STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics) education, personal photography and videography, and thousands of individuals with a love for flying and building drones. It is easy to get into the recreational drone community today, with countless consumer drones available, ready to fly, ranging from hundred dollar toy-like drones to thousand dollar or more camera-equipped systems (Van Sack). While these recreational drones vary greatly, they all have a similar structure and operation. Beyond use by simple hobbyists, recreational drones could have a real benefit in higher education. Their use could greatly transform conventional research and teaching. Drones can be used to survey exotic sites like rainforests and volcanoes, and they can be used for collecting data on flora and fauna species, geographic mapping, and more (Khazaee). The photography aspect of drones can be great for campus film and media studies, and there are countless opportunities within student groups (Khazaee). Three-dimensional modeling can also be used with pictures taken from drones, for functions like terrain or building mapping and analysis (Khazaee).

Currently, the FAA does define some regulations for recreational drones. The agency allows drone operation without any kind of certification or permission if the aircraft is used only for hobby/recreational purposes, weighs less than 55 pounds, does not interfere with manned aircraft, is not flown within 5 miles of an airport without permission, and remains within view of the operator at all times (United States, Federal Aviation Administration, "The FAA Modernization" 68). The most important restrictions here are that the drone must remain in the line-of-sight of the operator, and it must not be flown within 5 miles of an airport or other no fly zone. These "no-fly zones" generally surround airports and other government or military buildings. As a whole, these regulations are a good start to ensure public safety, but they need to be expanded. 

When used commercially, drones have incredible potential and a myriad of practical applications as well, including goods and medical deliveries, agriculture, inspection, emergency response, and more. Currently, however, the commercial potential of drones is limited under the same FAA regulations as recreational drones (United States Federal Aviation Administration, "Small UAS Notice" 10-11). Along with adhering to the FAA flight guidelines, commercial drone pilots must also pass a series of requirements, including aviation knowledge tests and special certifications (United States, Federal Aviation Administration, "Small UAV Notice" 11-12).  The most limiting, and controversial, regulation for commercial drones is the line-of-sight rule; this rule inhibits several potential commercial drone applications, such as goods and medical supply deliveries. 

Based on its array of uses and capacities, the commercial drone market holds a lot of potential. "Private sector" drones are expected to create more than 70,000 jobs in the US within 3 years of implementation, according to a study by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), the industry's leading trade group (Wolfgang). Niall McCarthy, a journalist for an independent statistics database, supports this statement by declaring, "By 2025, the direct economic impact of the commercial drone sector will reach $5 billion" (McCarthy). The issue is that this economic benefit will not be fully experienced under the FAA's current policies. If the FAA's policies are changed, specifically the line-of-site policy, many states will experience these major economic boosts. California is projected to gain the most, with more than 12,000 new jobs (Wolfgang). More than 30 states have shown interest in the drone industry, but again, a lot depends on the FAA's work (Wolfgang). As such, it is crucial that the FAA properly integrate commercial drones as soon as possible. The line-of-site regulations do not allow for drones to be fully integrated into society, which would clearly have a huge economic impact.

There are still several commercial drone applications that can be utilized under the current FAA regulation, and the FAA has recognized several. These include, among others, wildlife evaluations and bridge inspections (United States, Federal Aviation Administration, "Small UAS Notice" 10-11). In Texas and Nebraska, for example, drones have been used to examine fish populations in rivers and streams, which has lead to useful information on ecosystem conservation in the areas (Smith 293). Additionally, several states have implemented drone use for inspecting bridges and pipeline (Smith 294). Without the aid of drones, activities like these would take a considerably greater amount of time and money. Surveying large wildlife areas would take a long time for humans on foot or in vehicles, and inspecting infrastructure would require expensive safety equipment and many workers. These examples of current drone uses indicate that the more commercial drones are implemented into society, the more benefits society will see.

One of the industries with the greatest potential gain from using commercial drones is agriculture. The main idea behind using drones in agricultural situations is their positive impact on economic and environmental precision; farmers want to apply exactly the right amount of any input, like water, fuel, labor, etc., to effectively and efficiently produce high crop yields. Drones can be used to monitor crop fields from above, easily replacing most field crop scouting currently done by humans (Thomasson). Drones can keep track of their relative location in a field using GPS, and then analyze specific regions and sample crops from many different areas (Thomasson). Special remote sensing technologies can be applied to give drones "machine vision", to be able to analyze things like vegetation density, water deficit, crop stress, and more. Treatment can then be applied only where and when it is needed (Thomasson).

Many individuals and organizations that oppose consumer drone use are seeking ways to protect themselves. Some call for a complete ban on all consumer drones, and many others are looking for strict policies and complex security devices to combat potential drone confrontations. One such device is called DroneShield, which detects drones flying in the vicinity and alerts those involved. The device can only detect the drone and cannot remove or restrict it from the airspace (Ripley). The owners of the property must find a way to deal with the drone from there, but actions like shooting down drones or jamming signals are illegal (Ripley). A similar, though even more sophisticated, device is being used in Israel to defend against both military and amateur drones. This device can detect and shoot down drones from up to 70 kilometers away in a matter of seconds. Several countries are creating similar systems, but mostly to defend against military drones (Iron Dome). Not only are devices like these incapable of complete protection from drones; they are also expensive and difficult to attain. These types of high-tech drone defense systems would be impractical for local governments across the United States. 

Instead of expensive, high-tech drone defense systems, the best course of action to protect against drones is to make a few small changes to current FAA regulations. A great way to defend against reckless and malicious flying is simply to drone operators on legal and responsible drone use. Mandatory training courses and licenses for drone operators would be extremely beneficial. The government already requires knowledge of relevant laws and proficiency in operation before allowing someone to become a licensed motor vehicle driver. Accordingly, mandatory operator training and licensing is a necessary addition to the FAA's consumer drone policy. (Clarke 155). Furthermore, no-fly zones should include any densely populated public areas, such as parks, sporting events, and school campuses. Extending the no-fly zones would significantly reduce the risk of damage caused by a malfunctioning drone. Lastly, as mentioned, commercial drones must be allowed to fly outside of the line-of-site of the operator for maximum effectiveness. Drones cannot reasonably accomplish operations like emergency assistance, disaster relief, and delivery services if they must remain within the line-of-site of the operator.

Some drone enthusiasts and drone manufacturers may argue that even these proposed regulations violate personal freedoms. Often, these people will claim that restrictions on drone use limit their potential to help society. The problem with this argument, though, is that drones are far too powerful to go completely unregulated. Through these regulations from the FAA, a balance can be struck which allows for drones to benefit society while still ensuring safety and security. President Obama represented this idea up well when stating that we must, "strike the 'right balance' between national security and civil liberties (Koerner 1131)." These regulations are not meant to restrict drone potential or encourage a totalitarian government; they are simply there to keep everyone safe.

As a whole, drones have the potential to provide a major benefit to society both commercially and recreationally. From education and job openings to agriculture and emergency response, the numerous advantages of drones in society cannot be ignored. As such, drones must be integrated into society as soon as possible. Although the risks regarding a drone-filled society are clear, the previously mentioned additions and changes to the FAA's drone policy will allow for maximum benefit to society while minimizing safety and security risks. All drone operators, both recreational and commercial, must be required to take safety courses and obtain a license in order to fly. The FAA must continue to strictly enforce illegal airspace laws around airports and densely populated public areas. The airspace laws must also be extended to include any public place with bystanders that could be harmed. Amateur drones must only be allowed to fly within the operator's line of site. Commercial drones, conversely, must be allowed to fly greater distances in order for their benefits to society to be fully realized. 

